Department of Industrial Economics and Technology Management, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.
Appl Ergon. 2011 Jan;42(2):261-96. doi: 10.1016/j.apergo.2010.07.002. Epub 2010 Sep 17.
This literature review aims to identify occupational musculoskeletal and mental health effects of production system rationalization as well as organizational-level measures that may improve health outcome ("modifiers" in this review). A short review of the effect of ergonomic interventions is included as background and rationalization is discussed as a theoretical concept. Indicator variables for occupational musculoskeletal and mental health and related risk factors are presented. Variables with a generalized format were allowed in the literature searches (e.g., job satisfaction and absenteeism were accepted as risk factor and health indicator, respectively), suitable for the research fields of work sociology, organization science, human resource management (HRM) and economics research. One hundred and sixty-two studies of rationalization effects on health and risk factors and 72 organization-level modifier results were accepted into the final database. Entries were sorted by rationalization strategy and work life sector, and trends in outcome (positive, mixed, no effect, or negative effect on health and risk factors) were determined. Rationalizations have a dominant negative effect on health and risk factors (57% negative, 19% positive); the most negative effects were found for downsizing and restructuring rationalizations in general (71 studies negative, 13 positive) and for the health care sector in particular (36 studies negative, 2 positive). The rationalization strategy High Performance Work System (HPWS) was associated with the highest fraction positive outcome studies (6 of 10 studies). Other rationalization strategies (lean practices, parallel vs. serial production and mechanization level) reported intermediate results, in part dependent on work life sector, but also on the year when studies were carried out. Worker participation, resonant management style, information, support, group autonomy and procedural justice were modifiers with favourable influence on outcome. It is concluded that production system rationalization represents a pervasive work life intervention without a primary occupational health focus. It has considerable and mostly negative influence on worker health, but this can be reduced by attention to modifiers. The results create a basis for new priorities in ergonomic intervention research.
本文献综述旨在确定生产系统合理化对职业肌肉骨骼和心理健康的影响，以及可能改善健康结果的组织层面措施（本综述中的“调节剂”）。还包括对人体工程学干预效果的简短回顾，并将合理化作为理论概念进行讨论。提出了职业肌肉骨骼和心理健康及相关危险因素的指标变量。文献检索允许使用通用格式的变量（例如，工作满意度和缺勤率分别被接受为危险因素和健康指标），适用于工作社会学、组织科学、人力资源管理（HRM）和经济学研究领域。接受了 162 项关于合理化对健康和危险因素的影响的研究和 72 项组织层面调节剂结果进入最终数据库。条目按合理化策略和工作生活部门进行排序，并确定结果趋势（对健康和危险因素的积极、混合、无影响或负面影响）。合理化对健康和危险因素具有主导的负面影响（57%为负面，19%为正面）；总体而言，裁员和重组合理化的负面影响最大（71 项为负面，13 项为正面），特别是医疗保健部门（36 项为负面，2 项为正面）。合理化策略高绩效工作系统（HPWS）与最高比例的阳性结果研究相关（10 项研究中有 6 项为阳性）。其他合理化策略（精益实践、平行与串行生产和机械化水平）报告了中间结果，部分取决于工作生活部门，但也取决于研究开展的年份。工人参与、共鸣管理风格、信息、支持、小组自治和程序正义是对结果有有利影响的调节剂。结论是，生产系统合理化代表了一种普遍的工作生活干预措施，没有主要的职业健康重点。它对工人健康有相当大的负面影响，但通过关注调节剂可以减少这种影响。结果为人体工程学干预研究创造了新的优先事项的基础。
